SCREENED AT THE 2003 CINEVEGAS FILM FESTIVAL: Is it in the nature of every gambler to be a loser? I suppose since if they were winning it wouldn’t be gambling. But even the professionals never seem to be content with having the edge on everyone. Knowing more about their opponents then the cards they are holding, but less about the life in general that allows them the opportunity to enjoy it. Stu “The Kid” Unger could have just been another in the long line of movie characters following the same sad path in life, but his tale was a real one. Albeit, a pretty familiar one.

Stuey (Michael Imperioli), as he was affectionately known by his friends, had a talent for the cards since he was young, hustling the locals out of money while his father, a bookie in the local mob, approved of sticking up for himself but frowned on the extracurriculars. Dad’s boss, Vincent (Michael Nouri), took a shine to the kid would eventually look over him after his father’s death. (Similar to A Bronx Tale, the mother all but disappears.)

As Stuey grew up, his talents with the 52-shuffle increased, but only along with his taste of the odds he couldn’t control; namely horses. After getting in too far with the competing crews, Stuey is forced to head out to Las Vegas with a chance to repay his debt by winning a gin rummy tournament. The lure of Sin City was wide open to a magician like Stuey and soon he’ll find himself winning the World Series of Poker two years in a row and the youngest player ever at that.

Up-and-down goes the life of the gambler though and, unfortunately in the movies, usually pretty black-and-white. Writer/director A.W. Vidmer tries to get away from the cards and focus on his familial relationships. It’s nice to see a daughter express her love for such a character amidst the usual spousal scrapes. If there’s an original angle to take it would be the one to go with. But like a deadbeat dad, spending more time with her in the story would have enriched what that picture at the poker table meant to him in the final scenes.

We’ve seen the woman in a gambler’s life either not understanding their gift/addiction and during the scenes with Renee Faia’s Angela, like Stuey, we’d rather be hitting the tables. In fact, the more one knows about Stuey’s life, especially in the post-Vegas days, the further disappointment sets-in at how 101 the screenplay approaches the material. Dramatic liberties will always be enforced, details will be condensed and names changed to protect and avoid getting permission, but why tell the same ol’ story when the tiniest of elements can freshen it up?

Reading people, counting cards, however it was done, there’s only a little of it on display in Stuey. Here’s a man whose cockiness for showing off his talents got him locked out of underground games and eventually the big rooms in Vegas. Stu’s relationship with Bob Stupak (designer of Vegas’ Stratosphere) began when he counted down the final 156 cards of a six-deck shuffle without missing a beat. It was the beginning of a beautiful friendship where Stupak would later bankroll Stuey. An anonymous benefactor who produced ten grand for Stu to re-enter the World Series at the 11th hour after nearly a decade out of the game is hinted at, but this interesting foray into his life is whittled down in scope to encounters with Mr. Leo (nicely played by Pat Morita) and a local player named DJ (Joe LaDue, also doing an admirable job.)

No magician wants to give away their tricks. Stuey’s initial encounter with Leo comes close and feeds into the legend, but like gamblers ourselves we want more; the big score. Films about card players always want to bluff us into buying the pot without ever seeing the full hand. Imperioli is giving us everything in his performance, finding a middle ground between the hothead he plays on The Sopranos and the bottomed-out addict he portrayed in Sweet Nothing. Like the best work that actors can accomplish, he garners our attention and draws us in to see the life through his eyes up to the telling shots of him trying to peer over the shaded glasses of the screenplay.

Vidmer tells a clean story from beginning-to-end. The usual hackneyed flashback retelling of a story works here as both a soulful reckoning (a testament to Imperioli’s performance) as well as a mystery to his eventual demise for those who don’t already know the circumstances. A respect for the man and his life is clear from Vidmer who avoids exploiting moments of drug abuse and hostility. As the poster tells us four things about Stuey (“Gambler. Addict. Loser. Legend”) it’s disappointing that the final film can only fulfill on three of the four. Not a bad percentage, but for the story of a man who continually bucked the odds of the card racket, 4-for-4 would have suited him best.